Replies

Many, if not all, suppposed "restorations" of ancient ruins are roundly criticized by "experts," who believe that no restoration can be accurate. They may be correct; still, it's helpful to see some buildings on ancient sites brought back to the way they probably looked.

The ruins of Knossos on Crete were infamously restored by Brit archeologist Sir Arthur Evans, who was scathingly criticized for his freehand methods. For moi, trotting through restored palace rooms made the place come to life, but scholars still carp.

I.E. "From the beginning it proved necessary to preserve and restore the monuments (at Knossos) that were being uncovered. A number of parts of the Palace were restored in this way, and considerable use was made of reinforced concrete in the work. The parts of the restoration that represent timber frames and other wooden structures were formerly painted yellow, but were later re painted by a colour conventionally representing wood. In a number of places, copies of the famous frescoes discovered, were installed. This method of restoration has received much criticism since it used materials foreign to Minoan architecture. Some scholars also dispute some of the conclusions of the pioneer British excavator."

From what we've recently learned of Saddam's level of taste, his Babylon restorations might have been done in plastic and neon...I'd carp about that too.